zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Ogg Videos?
Before I started up the Zeldapedia Youtube page, I uploaded a few videos as .ogg files. The idea was kinda dropped because at the time only Chrome had native playback of these files. With the next versions of browsers coming around, native support of .ogg files is becoming more common. We still have at least on of the files still on the site: I have tested it out and it works natively in Chrome and Opera 11. I also tested it in IE9 Beta but it only played back the sound from the video. I haven't tested Safari or Firefox but I would assume that Firefox 4 will pry have support for it. While using these files wouldn't be practice until they worked in all major browsers, I figured I would start the discussion on possible future uses for .ogg video files. Were we now have the Youtube page, there pry isn't a need to have videos uploaded. However, there might be instances where there are videos we want for the Wiki but really don't fit into how we have the Youtube page structured. When I initially uploaded those .ogg video files there were some other issues. At the time Wikia would only allow .ogg files to be uploaded. However, the videos are natively .ogv files but can be made to be .ogg files. I talked to Wikia about this and they said they would look into adding both .ogv and .oga (audio specific) support. Now it appears that Wikia does allow for .ogv uploads. I'm not sure if it would change anything but it might fix issues with how it plays back in some browsers. If people think there is a use for having .ogg video or .ogv files, then I could upload a test video of that is .ogv to see how it differs if any. While maybe not practice now, I think it could be something useful. I think it is worth consideration, and I'm curious on what peoples thoughts are; good, bad, or otherwise. Please feel free to discuss. --Birdman5589 (talk) 04:52, January 21, 2011 (UTC) Discussion Well, first off, I use Seamonkey (old version of firefox, updated thingy of mozilla suite) now, so if it works in Seamonkey, really good chance it'll work in Firefox. I personally think .ogg files are good, (I've uploaded some over at Green Day Wiki), as they don't involve the embedding and the possibility of the video being removed under copyright grounds, because we know that's all youtube does now. Only thing I see is Mr. Narwhal uploading his anthem and saving it under a related title and posting it to pages. But that's probably not gonna happen. I don't really see any disadvantages unless someone is using a really outdated browser. *raises hand and admits it's a tad outdated* --'ϐαςς ᴶαϟϟι ' 05:07, January 21, 2011 (UTC) I'm running whatever the current version of Firefox is, and it plays fine, video and audio. It sounds like there are some perks to using .oog. I do have some concerns about using it instead of youtube: *Our videos will not come up on youtube searches. *As far as I can tell, this method has no way to set the resolution like youtube has. This is useful when trying to see the video in higher quality, or trying to drop the quality so it downloads faster, like when you're on a slow connection. *Having everything on the youtube page lends a certain level of organization, whereas one cannot readily dig through videos that are on ZP itself. *Either there would be no annotations, or there would be ones that could be shut off. Correct me if I'm wrong on how any of these work. Add them to the disadvantages header if they make sense to you.--[[User:Fierce Deku|'Fierce']][[User talk:Fierce Deku|'Deku']] 05:48, January 21, 2011 (UTC) Okay, so I've been meaning to ask this for a while but you got a bit too far into the process of what I am about to discuss, and then I forgot. Aside from the obvious disadvantages we get from not using YouTube like what Fierce Deity says, we can just add them as files to allow for easy embedding and resizing. Why you did away with this when you replaced the videos, I have no idea, as there is absolutely nothing to be gained from "demoting" them to be plain old video links in my estimation. I seem to recall specifically saying we can just keep them as video "files" when you first came up with the idea for the project, but I could be mistaken. Suffice it to say, re-implementing the video "file" system seems to be best option, as we can retain the best possible advantages of both solutions. --Auron'Kaizer ' 10:16, January 21, 2011 (UTC) If we can get to the point were these files can playback in all major browsers, I think we should go to the file system. At the same time we can keep the Youtube page up and running. The video files would not have the annotations but the page they are on would have the information anyway. By keeping the Youtube page, we still can keep any advantages it has. We could even add an annotation link to the start of every video that would link to Zeldapedia and maybe add a link on the homepage that goes to the Youtube page. However, every video on a page would become a file instead of a link. --Birdman5589 (talk) 16:30, January 21, 2011 (UTC) This might be a bit much, but wouldn't it be completely possible for someone with good video editing software (Sony Vegas for instance) and skill to edit in the annotations as text inside the video? It would probably be a lot more work, but in the long run, so was the actual Youtube page/videos and, personally, I've always found that edited text look makes it far more cleaner and appealing than the annotations over the video. - McGillivray227 21:39, January 21, 2011 (UTC) :The thing with using annotations though is people have the option to turn them off. Editing the text in does look better but then it is always there. Annotations give the viewer flexibility at least. I know with .ogv files, you can add in subtitles. I'm not sure how to do that or how they show up but that could be an option if using these files instead of Youtube. --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:13, January 21, 2011 (UTC) Out of Date Handlers I was looking at the page and noticed that our OggHandler is a very old version. We are running r32443, where the latest revision is r80687. This extension is bundled with the Java applet Cortado, which is used to play back .ogg, .ogv, and .oga files if the browser does not have native playback support. If this extension is updated to the latest version, it might fix issues where the videos cannot playback on some browsers. Wikia File Size Limit Due to Wikia's file size limit, videos would have to have a much smaller bit rate if they were to be uploaded here. I tested it by making The Wind Waker Prologue to be slightly under this 10 MB limit. This resulted in a noticeable decrease in quality. The text was fuzzy and some of the details in the video were lost. --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:13, January 21, 2011 (UTC) :I did the same test on the A Link to the Past Prologue and had the same results. While it wasn't nearly as noticeable, it quality defiantly suffered in order to reach this file size lime. --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:52, January 21, 2011 (UTC) Advantages *Adding the videos to a page is just like how images are handled. This can lead to easy resizing, scroll over text, alignment, etc. *Since it is a file on the site, there is no issues with a video buffering and playback and scanning is almmost instantaneous. Disadvantages *Not all browsers, including mobile, currently have native playback. *Wikia has a file size upload limit of 10MB.